[author]Liu Zhenyu

[content]

The natural law basis of the metaverse order

* Liu Zhenyu

Associate Professor, School of Philosophy and Law and Politics, Shanghai Normal University

Abstract: If the metaverse becomes a reality in the future, what does humanity want the metaverse order to look like? Because the architecture of the metaverse order is composed of algorithmic contracts that operate independently as the metaverse and smart contracts that are connected to the "metaverse-real universe", a desirable metaverse order must meet the ethical requirements in the dual contract architecture to avoid moral anomie. The fundamental goodness of natural law (e.g., life, play, practical reason, etc.), with its diversity and sequence, provides its normative basis.

Keywords: metaverse; Indenture; basic goodness; specification

Although the "metaverse" is still controversial at the existential level, it has existed as a concept driven by capital. This concept is considered to have the possibility of order change, and it is another singularity in the evolution of human civilization. In this sense, how the metaverse order should be constructed, or what kind of metaverse order is desirable for human beings, has become one of the unavoidable important theoretical propositions. If the development of technology will determine whether human society has the opportunity to enter the metaverse, a new world that is still in the spectrum of possible worlds at this stage, then the guidance of theory can affect what type of metaverse society we will enter in the future. As in the Axial Age or the Age of Enlightenment, natural law will provide the answer.

The dual contractual structure of the metaverse order

The "Metaverse", like the "modern", first appeared in the field of literature, and then penetrated into the field of commerce and became known to the general public. Therefore, similar to the connotation of the concept of "modernity", the image of "metaverse" is also like the face of Proteus, and there are different interpretations in different fields. Therefore, it is necessary to ask "what is the metaverse", but we must also accept the helplessness at this stage: if you don't ask, you still think you understand; Once asked, it is difficult to answer if it is true. What's more, considering the contextual translation, the "meta" and "meta-" in the "metaverse" are by no means corresponding. In the Chinese context, "yuan" means "basic" or "beginning", which is far from the "after" or "beyond" of "meta-" in the English context; On the contrary, Mr. Qian Xuesen's translation of "Spiritual Realm" for "Virtual Reality" is more in line with the connotation and more in line with the needs of Xindaya. Fortunately, although the battle of words affects the signified, it does not affect the signified. Whether it is called "metaverse" or "spiritual realm" (or something else) in Chinese, it can be used to describe a new ecosystem that uses the entire human body as a "sensory node" to "advance the development of the Internet to the 4.0 era". The order of this new ecosystem is built by a dual-contract architecture.

The first layer of contract architecture is the operating architecture of the metaverse as an independent universe, the algorithm contract

As a presentation of virtual reality, in the narrative of the metaverse, it is allowed to have scenarios that transcend the existing order of the real universe and even violate the basic technical principles of the real universe. Although at the technical level, the metaverse is based on the computing power in the real universe, and the high-end computing power network can bring a better metaverse survival experience, just as electricity is needed to run electrical appliances; However, the metaverse order, as a version of the possible universe being virtually realized, does not simply place the real scene of the current stage of the real universe or the real scene that has occurred in history in a virtual space that does not occupy the real physical space, but relies on human imagination to explore a scene that does not exist in the real universe at this stage but has a probability of existing in the real universe at a certain stage in the future. In view of the differences between human beings in the metaverse and the real universe, if human imagination wants to be presented in the metaverse, it is inseparable from algorithmic contracts.After all, in the real universe, human beings are already embedded in it, whether as observers or as experiencers, human beings and the real universe are inseparable, because if there are no human beings, we have no way to confirm whether the real universe is what it is now. In contrast, in the metaverse, the "observer or experiencer" can be a human (e.g., a gamer), but it may or may not be a human (e.g., artificial intelligence), or even there may be no "observer or experiencer" (just a presentation of code, such as Conway's "game of life"); At the same time, even if there are "observers or experiencers", they are only phenomena after the code has been calculated by algorithms, not real beings with the attributes of the real universe. It's not even projection, because projection also needs the material support of the real universe. Therefore, the independent architecture of the metaverse is essentially a specific result of multiple algorithms matching each other and agreeing on the computational logic: it does not depend on the person who designed the algorithm, because the person who designed the algorithm may not use this algorithm for the construction of the metaverse; It also does not depend on the person who uses the algorithm (whether it is the designer, observer or experiencer of the metaverse), because the combination of the algorithm itself must conform to the internal logic of the algorithm, otherwise the metaverse will malfunction (bug) or even "die" (unable to be further calculated).As a result, the combination of algorithms and algorithms has shaped the metaverse; Rather, the union of people (Internet version 1.0) or the union of things (Internet of Things version 1.0 / Internet version 3.0). The combination of algorithms and algorithms is also subject to the provisions of algorithms, and then the algorithms are superimposed to form an independent system with reflexivity: only the algorithms specified by the metaverse algorithm are the algorithms of the metaverse. This means that any interaction in the metaverse is essentially the externalization of algorithmic transformation; Any existence in the metaverse is essentially an externalization of algorithmic transformation. Although there are high-order and low-order differences between different algorithms, they are equal and consistent in reflexivity, so the association between them is a contractual expression.

The second-layer contract architecture is the docking architecture between the metaverse and the real universe, the smart contract

If the first layer of contract architecture is a transformation of the form of the contract, then the second layer of the contract architecture is a transformation of the content of the contract. Like other types of smart contracts, smart contracts in the metaverse also retain the right to choose "connected/unconnected", however, instead of using 2D planes as a medium, they will move to 3D scenes. This makes it, even if considered by the current social algorithm of the metaverse, it not only deepens the synergy between vision and hearing, but also expands the space of touch and explores the possibilities of taste and smell. Only by fully mobilizing the human senses can the metaverse become a truly new universe, rather than a simple vassal of the real universe. This means that people who intend to intervene in the metaverse ecosystem need to transcode more natural biological information into virtual beings in the metaverse through algorithms if they want to have a more perfect metaverse experience.In the human-computer interaction of the Internet version 2.0, this kind of natural biological information has neither the realistic possibility of transcoding (which cannot be achieved by technology) nor the realistic desirability (this kind of information has nothing to do with the function of artificial intelligence). The metaverse society is not only technically able to solve the problem of the whole body sensory node, but at the same time, it also strips the functional direction through smart contracts in order to achieve the infinite possibility of expanding the imagination within the metaverse. The latter means that the smart contract releases a deeper signal of choice: it is up to one person to choose what their metaverse looks like. Therefore, a person in the real universe can only experience the real metaverse by completely transcoding into the "data existent" in the metaverse, and then embedding it in the first-layer contract architecture, and achieving the transformation of the algorithm with the existence of the algorithm.

The first is the natural law basis of the contractual structure

The social order of the metaverse built by algorithmic contracts is a kind of "game" (game) type development. This is not because the so-called "first share of the metaverse" in 2021 is a stake in a game company, after all, it is just a commercial phenomenon that exists in the economic system of a real universe. Rather, it is because the algorithmic contract, as the first contract architecture of the metaverse, not only exists before the metaverse society (without the algorithmic contract, it is impossible to build the metaverse), but also coexists with the metaverse (if the algorithmic contract is not followed, then it is impossible to become an existence in the metaverse). This is exactly the same as the rules of the game: "The game creates order, and the game is order". The algorithm contract creates order, and with its reflexivity without human resource costs, it "provides a technical means that can be sustained", creating an immersive virtual entertainment life for human beings that can be connected at any time without worrying about physical limitations, "completely subverting the concept of games in daily discourse, and constituting a third world that is different from the first and second worlds, that is, the real world of virtual time and space"; The algorithmic contract is order, a universe that "steps out of the 'real' life" and belongs purely to "games". At this point, the significance of natural law comes into being.

On the one hand, the "game" itself is the fundamental good recognized by natural law, and therefore a "universe of games" must be based on natural law

According to John Finnis, a representative of the new natural law theory, the basic goodness of human society includes the following seven types: life, knowledge, play, aesthetic experience, friendship, practical reason, and religion. "What is good is intrinsically different from what makes a person happy." Games will bring happiness to people; However, happiness is not an essential attribute of the game. Happiness is nothing more than a desire, and it is a desire that comes from animal nature (physiological genes, nerve impulses) rather than social nature (human relationships), which makes it very far from the basic good that is inherent in human society.Man not only needs to obtain the satisfaction of desires, but also to pursue a deeper good; Happiness is only a by-product of the human pursuit of the good, even without happiness. For example, in the course of a limited game with the goal of winning, the player who fails to win may not be happy, but the game is still a game. The distinction between "finite games" and "infinite games" here shows that games that exist as ontologies "can be realized in a variety of uncertain ways under uncertain circumstances", so that there are various concrete games in different forms in the human world. In these figurative games, there is a distinction between "good and bad/good and evil", but even if it is a "bad/evil" game, it is still a game, not something else; Moreover, this distinction between "good and bad/good and evil" does not rely on the assignment of "happiness", after all, in many cases, "bad/evil" games are more likely to stimulate the instinctive desires of animals and make people happy. It is necessary to recognise, then, that play can neither be directly classified as true or good, nor can it be evaluated by the central utilitarian concern of "pleasure", but must be something beyond worldly morality or pleasure itself. In this sense, to say that games are "good" simply means that it makes it easier to understand the specific human behavior of pursuing games and the dedication in pursuing them.In this process, human behavior itself has an upward force, and the preference and choice of human beings as a kind of nature rather than as an individual is brought to the fore at this time. Without this existence, humanity is incomplete: neither theoretical deduction nor historical records can exist as a "human world without games". On this basis, the various forms of existence of games do not come from artificial presuppositions, it does not need to depend on a specific cultural soil, and it itself is the standard of practice for all mankind.

On the other hand, similar to the distinction between "games as existence" and "games of representation", the metaverse as existence is not a simple collection of various algorithmic contracts that have been given the name of "metaverse", but a new existence that transcends the embodiment of algorithmic contracts. The basis for this understanding comes from the dichotomy between "nature" and "custom" in natural law theory.

As an existing metaverse, it cannot be judged by the most characteristic behavioral rules presented by a specific embodied metaverse. Even though the metaverse is understood as a "game", the specific behavioral rules of the game only constitute the specific operating habits of a certain type of game, and are the "customs" that belong to this game. Although not all subjects involved in the metaverse will follow the algorithmic contract-based operating habits that are unique to the metaverse, if he or she wants to play the game properly, he or she needs to follow the operating habits already determined by the algorithmic contract; Each step of the game will be adjudicated by the algorithmic contract in order to confirm whether the participant's participation behavior is "correct" in accordance with the rules of the game, and does not form a loophole that is not conducive to the continued operation of the algorithmic contract.There is no doubt that the operating habits dominated by this set of algorithmic contracts are important to this particular metaverse, but this pre-existing and specific algorithmic contract is only given to this specific universe by the designers of this metaverse, and its so-called "legitimacy" can only be traced back to the designers themselves, just as the former Greek city-states attributed customs to the gods who created them; And those who seek the essence of nature and "talk about nature" are completely different from those who "talk about the gods" before them. In a variety of metaverse scenarios, there may be different "gods", but they are all under the connotation of basic goodness. For example, building a metaverse library with metaverse technology has been put on the agenda. "Building an Immersive Metaverse Library...... It is necessary to reconstruct the relationship between 'people, fields, and things' in the metaverse library."The basis of this relationship reconstruction is the algorithm contract exclusive to the metaverse library. The contract, which is both the metaverse and the library: an immersive experience, a game experience; The library experience, however, is not a game. The function of the existence of the library is to preserve and display public knowledge and nothing else, and even the virtualization of the metaverse will not change this essence. As a result, "knowledge", another basic good in the form of human society, is embedded in the scene built by the basic good of "game", and is manifested in the form of "game experience". The same is true for friendship, aesthetics, religion and so on.

The second is the natural law basis of the contractual structure

Although the metaverse society is a "game" society, this does not mean that for that society, the "game" as a basic good can override or exclude the existence of other basic good. The smart contract architecture marks that the metaverse society is independent but not isolated. Humans embedded in the system of the metaverse society will inevitably live in the metaverse society according to the algorithmic contract of the metaverse social system, but if the metaverse society cannot be effectively connected with humans, then this universe will "not exist" for human society. For human society as a whole, all basic goodness is equal in form, and there is neither priority nor mutual transformation. However, as an individual living in human society, he or she can make rational judgments based on his own life, and choose one or some basic goodness over other basic goodness in a specific time and space. Choosing to enter the "game" of the metaverse society is a choice; Choosing to enter the game of "which basic good takes precedence" is still a choice. The basic goodness of natural law is again manifested at this time.

First, as long as an individual makes a choice, no matter what choice he makes, he cannot be guided by the basic good of "practical reason", because it is the ability to "use his intellect to make choices about his actions and ways of life, and to shape his or her own personality."

According to practical reason as the theory of natural law refers to, there is no unified purpose for human beings. The so-called "unity" is nothing more than the fact that each individual "happens" to be "coincidentally" expressed in phenomena and "manifested" to others together based on his or her own practical rational choice. Therefore, people who happen to choose the same metaverse game will find that they have a unified purpose, and in such a metaverse game, they can play better. There are many reasons why this game is chosen over another game, either because the rules of the metaverse created by the first contract structure of this metaverse game are in line with the individual's desire for a certain type of basic good, or it may also be because the human society linked by the second contract structure of this metaverse game is necessary for this individual to maintain or pursue a certain type of basic good, or even others. But whatever the choice, there is inevitably a reason for the choice that is practical reason (whether that reason arises before the choice or is re-given after the choice), and can only be sustained if it is guided by practical reason.Indeed, for each individual, there is a sequence of different basic good. As for the "friendship" at the forefront of the basic good sequence, priority will be given to the social metaverse; If the "aesthetics" are at the forefront of the basic good sequence, the creative metaverse will be preferred; As for the "knowledge" at the forefront of the basic good sequence, the library metaverse is preferred...... Etcetera. However, the priority of this sequence is only the result of practical rational choice. The existence of the basic good sequence means that each individual can not only choose a specific class of metaverse order as the result of choice, but also do not need to stick to a specific class of metaverse order. This means that as long as the first contract of the metaverse order contains the basic goodness of natural law theory, then as long as the individual chooses based on practical reason, no matter which metaverse order he or she ultimately chooses as the destination, it will be in accordance with natural law: human beings are rational beings. "The will does not simply obey laws or laws, it obeys because he is himself a legislator, and because of this law he makes the laws himself, he must obey."

Secondly, and the objective basis of all these choices, is that the individual is alive. The natural law theory's concern for the order of life has been consistent, especially since the modern era.

"The fear of death, the desire for the necessities of a comfortable life, and the hope of obtaining them through hard work, are the passions that push man towards peace." Thus Hobbes discovered the first law of nature: "Every man should strive for peace, as long as there is any hope of peace; In times when peace cannot be obtained, he can seek and take advantage of all the favorable conditions and assistance of war. "In contrast to the judgment of the classical period, in modern natural law theory, man is not essentially a political animal, but a self-preserving animal, fighting death with the continuation of individual life. Hobbes sets the tone for this change, "not nature, but 'nature's terrible adversary, death,' providing the ultimate guide." Man has nothing to do with politics in nature, but because of a "chance," he chooses to use political society to avoid unfavorable situations in the state of nature. At this time, there is still a difference between man and god and beast. However, this distinction has changed from the only "political" to two parts: "death" as opposed to God and "political" as opposed to the beast. "Politics" is no longer a context as a prerequisite for the whole, but has become the result of human beings in the context of "self-preservation" of individual lives.The individual is born at a time when he does not know what death is, but only has an attachment to life—the first cry represents the exaltation of the life force, which brings "the desire for the necessities of comfortable life and the hope of acquiring them through hard work", so that when the individual is mature enough to use his own practical reason to think, he can clearly realize that "life is a process of death; The fountain of life is the fountain of death." All the efforts in the world are only superficially delaying the arrival of death. The reason why the metaverse order can exist is based on the reflexivity of the first-tier contract architecture; The reason why the metaverse order is necessary to exist is based on the second contract architecture to connect it to the concrete life as a "person".Whether it is an individual or a human being, if the order of the metaverse cannot be related to the order of people, then the meaning of this order of the metaverse only belongs to the metaverse itself and not to human beings. After all, a so-called "human game" that no one is involved in, except for waiting for someone to participate in it again at some point in the future, is no longer a game that actually exists in human society, although it does still exist in verbal expressions. The same is true for the metaverse order as a game. Detached from human life, with only the first contract structure, the metaverse order itself can still exist, and even be sustainable. However, given that "no" people are involved in the metaverse order, then this metaverse loses its meaning to "people", and therefore, it is not the "metaverse order" discussed here.

Construct a desirable metaverse order

The core meaning of the state of things to which the theoretical concept relates is the "central situation". When the metaverse order really exists, the core meaning of the concept of "metaverse order" is "the order constructed by the dual contract architecture". This central situation points to both the theory of the construction of the order of the metaverse and the theory of the construction of the order of the metaverse. This involves the reflexivity of the theory itself, as well as the peculiarities of the two-contract architecture. For the first-tier contract architecture that "operates independently", the metaverse order has the inherent characteristics of a closed system, and everything else outside the system can be called an "environment". At the physical level, the boundaries between the system and the environment are unmistakably clear; The environment is not involved in the normal operation of the system. If we do not take into account the factors of natural law, it is entirely possible to consider this heavy contract architecture to be "purely technological", and only follow the logic of the code.However, the function of the second contract is highlighted: the system and the environment need to complete the communication of information flow, so that the code of the system is not affected by the environment does not mean that the information of the system is not affected by the environment, and the system will transcode and promote the system to complete self-renewal after obtaining the information of the environment. As a result, on the surface, the second contract sets up physical boundaries (such as terminal devices), but in fact there are "no boundaries", or in other words, the boundaries of "information communication" are blurred. Therefore, at first glance, the first-level contract architecture of the independent system is in the center, and the second-level contract architecture chain is at the periphery of the external environment. But in essence, the environment is not a periphery, it is essentially an important part of the central case. The first contract architecture can exist in the physical space without relying on the second contract architecture, however, without the second contract architecture, the first contract architecture is not enough to "appear" in front of human beings, that is, it no longer has human characteristics. Only when we understand both at the same time can we truly understand the central situation of the theory of the construction of the order of the metaverse. It is only in such a repeated interaction between the center and the periphery that the basic principle or principle of natural law, "what is good and practical reason", can be revealed.

The metaverse order is not something out of nothing, but something man-made. As a man-made thing, unless this creation is destined to go to the end of "killing people", no matter how profoundly it changes human life, it is only an object attached to man, or to man's nature, or to man's sociality. However, unlike artificial intelligence and the resulting risk of "robot subjectivity", the metaverse, which is simply constructed by the first contract and exists as an order, does not have the realistic possibility of "killing people". As a result, although some metaverse games allow "killing people" in the game, the "people" being killed at this time are just a series of encoded data, not real people living in the real order; Even the "human-machine link" does not change this fact.

This act of "killing people" is not contrary to the fundamental goodness of natural law. This is because in the first contract structure, "game" is the most important basic good, and the other basic goodness is secondary. Game norms are supreme norms, and this norm is created by people. If the norms in the human social order are "determined by the rational way of acting and the will of human beings in legislating or creating customs in a particular society", then the same is true of the norms of play in the metaverse order, where the people who create this particular metaverse order determine "what is good and permissible and what is evil and should be forbidden" among a particular player. Therefore, the behavioral rules of these "people" in the social order of the metaverse are not the basic goodness of "nature", but only the secondary goodness determined by man. However, even if some of the rules of the game (e.g., characters who can "kill" other players in the game) do not seem to be strictly consistent with the basic goodness of natural law, they will not arise if they are not tied to the basic good implicit in natural law: there must be a reason for this act of "killing people" that rationalizes it and is intrinsic to the game. This is not only because the first contract structure is already under the basic good of "game", but also because a metaverse order that completely violates or rejects other basic goodness is inherently contrary to human society and therefore undesirable.

This prohibition on "undesirable" relies on the second contractual structure. "The intuitive notion of justice is that the first principle of justice is itself the object of an primordial contract in a properly defined initial state." To be desirable is to conform to this intuitive concept; Not wanting is a violation of this intuitive concept. This is also why, when the first contract structure allows "killing people", it still does not violate the norms of natural law, and there is a possibility that it is desirable: this "person" is not "other" person, and this "killing people" is not "killing people", which does not violate the intuitive concept of normal people. Therefore, as an individual, people make preliminary judgments based on their own intuitive concepts, and then use practical rationality to choose to enter a specific metaverse order, which is desirable for the first contract structure; As a quasi-existence, it is desirable for the second contract structure to make preliminary judgments based on human intuition, and then use practical rational choice to confirm the existence of the metaverse order as a quasi-existence. For the former, it is only necessary to follow practical reason; The latter is even more critical. When Phoenix points out that the exact way to ask questions about the basic good is "...... Goodness in itself, what do you think? Far from reaffirming that the basic goodness of human society is "self-evident," he is further emphasizing that the basic goodness of "human society" is self-evident. "Human beings voluntarily do good and avoid evil, and one should choose only those wills and actions that are compatible with the prosperity of humanity as a whole."This means that "people" as individuals have the possibility of choosing to accept a specific metaverse order oriented by "giving up their lives", but for "people" who exist like this, such a specific metaverse order is "undesirable". The prescriptiveness of natural law on the existence of the class such as "human prosperity" and "good human life" transcends the basic good of the individual. A metaverse order of "people" and "desires" must be the desires of "people" as a class, rather than the desires of "people" who exist as individuals. Given that the first contract structure is "unmanned", the implementation of this transcendence can and can only be embedded in the second contract structure. At this time, the second contract architecture has been transformed from the "edge" of the construction of the metaverse order to the "center", because the "system" and the "environment" have been exchanged: whether the metaverse order is desirable or not is based on the desireability that conforms to the human social order; This criterion is related to Nature of Human Beings and is based on the norms of Natural Law.

The original article was published in the 7th issue of "Research on the Dialectics of Nature" in 2023, thanks to the WeChat public account "Fayuan Lou Tea Talk" for the authorization to push!